Scottish National Investment Bank

The proposed objectives and purposes for the Bank can't really be disagreed with. What could be open for further drilling down and debate is the details on how these will be achieved. Particularly on how it will help individual households & families.

Much like the objectives and purposes, it can't really be disagreed with. The devil will be in the details.

I would like to see detailed and reasonable proposals/schemes from the bank, that can grant credit to allow individual households/families to make the transition to green energy, and other green/efficient projects. Essentially a more widely extension of what the Scottish Energy Savings Trust offer. Transitioning the country from fossil fuel use to green use must (in my opinion) be the number 1 priority. Let's get solar panels and wind turbines for the country's homes, let's replace petrol & diesel cars with full electric ones, let's get much more charging points installed in our car parks (both public and places of work) let's get our transport and freight vehicles onto electric as well etc.

I don't see an issue with this in principal, but would like to see in more detail on how regular people can input and have themselves heard for feeding into these matters.

These missions are fine, though I would like to see the addition of something that will help folk out of large or expensive borrowing, particular those exploited through "pay day" and other predatory loaning. With guidance offered to direct people to the various supports and advice outlets available on how to determine if is is appropriate borrow for something, and if so how to do so in the most affordable manner possible.

Yes it is fine, but as below I would like to see in more detail on how regular people can input and have themselves heard for feeding into this.

No, I agree a PLC is the appropriate model.

If either more can be used to capitalise, or brought forward sooner, then either of course would be very welcome if that were possible.

I think as long as the model is built in a way that can be re-active to change (ideally pro-active when possible) and ensure it is not stuck in either overly prescriptive law or regulations. We have other & older areas of law/regulation that is extremely complex, lengthy and highly prescriptive. (Such as Crofting.) We need to be moving away from this to something more dynamic, while maintaining a core set or principals and objectives to achieve.

Based on the setup proposed and the decisions the bank will be required to make, it sounds like a degree would delegated powers would be required for it to function properly, and would agree with this happening.

While I do hope at least some of the Advisory Group membership will include a few regular individuals that have made use of the bank's services, I can apprecaite this could lead to anecdotal issues being thrown into the mix. So the group would need to be provided various bits of independent research and information on how the bank is doing against it's objectives, and other applicable facts/information being provided that will help inform the bank's direction in the future, to keep the group members involved on track of what is involved and what the ultimate strategic goals are.

I completely disagree with the notion that T&Cs of remuneration for some senior staff of the bank "may" have to reflect "market rates" of the private financial services sector. I would go so far to say that goes completely against one of the cornerstone objectives of the bank in being an ethical and pubic sector backed one.

Absolutely no bonuses on the table for any staff, and pay for the most senior of staff should not exceed the maximums set out in the Senior Civil Service pay grades. (Which are already many times above the average annual Scottish wage.)

This bank is to set a different standard to banking, that means going against the grain. If it means less "talent" then most of the public will happily live with it. "Talent" getting paid countless millions still succeeded in causing the worst financial crash of all time! So why would we want them employed for this bank? I can't over emphasise my point, do not break established Senior Civil Service pay grades to employ people to this bank.

The only policy and law changes that would be required is to ensure pay is tied to the public pay policy. The bank is to benefit the public right? So if they're doing their job, that should result in more/better levels of investments, and the improvement of people's lives & conditions. They will in turn experience that benefit over a strategic period of time, and therefore should mitigate in them undertaking any risky ventures.

As per my previous point, and it should be part of the bank's legislative bill, that pay for the most senior of staff should not exceed the maximums set out in the Senior Civil Service pay grades. (Which are already many times above the average annual Scottish wage.)